How Dare Cheney Criticize Obama for Taking Out a Terrorist

October 3, 2011 RSS Feed Print

By near-universal account of those who condemn terrorism, the killing of jihadist Anwar al-Awlaki was a good thing. This was a man believed to be behind the attempted Christmas Day, 2009 bombing of a U.S. aircraft over American soil. It was a man U.S. officials say was trying to blow up American cargo planes by putting explosives into the packages on the planes, a man believed to have been hatching plans to poison fellow Americans.

Al-Awlaki was killed last week in Yemen in a drone strike, not only ridding the world of a dangerous terrorist, but depriving al-Qaeda of a powerful recruiter.

And Dick Cheney wants President Obama to apologize for it.

[See a slide show of 6 vulnerable terrorist targets.]

The irrepressible former vice president sees the killing as justified, to be sure. He's just mad because he thinks Obama is hypocritical for criticizing what the Bush administration, in almost comically euphemistic terms, described as "enhanced interrogation techniques" used on imprisoned al Qaeda suspects. As Cheney told CNN's State of the Union:

They've agreed they need to be tough and aggressive in defending the nation and using some of the same techniques that the Bush administration did. And they need, as I say, to go back and reconsider some of the criticisms they offered about our policies.

The self-centeredness of the comment is astonishing. A key al-Qaeda subject is killed, and Cheney is thinking about what it means for the reputation of the previous administration? If we're demanding apologies here, why not demand apologies from the people who are screaming about the budget deficit now after voting for laws and wars that vastly increased the budget deficit? And the al-Awlaki killing doesn't have anything to do with waterboarding. We don't know whether al-Awlaki was found because of "enhanced interrogation techniques." There are surely legitimate questions to be asked about whether and why a U.S. citizen should be targeted, either on U.S. soil or abroad. But hypocrisy isn't the issue here.

[See photos of the prison at Guantánamo Bay.]

Former President Bush has been gracious and quiet as his successor takes on the problems of the economy and national security. If Bush has disagreed with what Obama has done, he's kept it to himself—something that is not only just good manners for a former president, but in the specific arena of national security, important to giving a sense of continuity in front of the international audience. How unfortunate that Cheney cannot behave in the same way.

Tags:
Obama administration,
terrorism,
national security terrorism and the military,
Dick Cheney

Reader Comments Read all comments (13)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Miss Milligan , you are absolutely spot on about Dick Cheney. Mr Cheny, and his daughterli

Liz, continually go around to talk shows dissing our president 0.

What this man has done is irreprehensible.

Obama left him off the hook. Cheny should have been tried for war crimes! So far he has escaped this.

Faux Cheney of AZ 11:42AM October 15, 2011

IF SUSAN MILLIGAN WERE MORE CHOOSY ABOUT WHO SHE CRAWLS INTO BED WITH IN HER DEM-SHILL CAPACITY...

She wouldn't have this continuous lovers quarrel going with Dick Cheney.

As other commentors pointed out, Cheney in no way demanded an apology from Obama. That's all in Susan Milligan's self-loathing head.

The self-loathing on her part comes from the fact that she and all the other libprogs climbed into bed with the Bush-Cheney neocon war-n-waste mongers back in 2008 as a way to get their guy Obama elected.

After about four years of bashing Bush-Cheney over Iraq, in 2008 the libprogs and dem shills such as Susan Milligan climbed back-end-up/face-down into perpetual-war bed with the very-same Bush-Cheney neocon war-n-waste mongers when they atta-boy, go-for-it slapped Candidate Obama on the back for his clearly-promised Af-Pak escalation. 'Cuz what better way for libprogs and dem shills such as Susan Milligan to show how 'stupid' Bush was than by their guy Obama showing everyone how a 'smart' war was conducted.

What a masterful stroke of evil genius on the part of Plouffe, Axelrod, and Dunn, to get the libprogs and dem shills such as Susan Milligan to swallow instead of spit an uninterrupted continuance of neocon war-n-waste mongering, and SO EASILY -- by portraying such as a grand means to further stick it to Bush.

They thought it was going to be a breeze -- Afghanistan. And essentially over before 2012. None of those libprog or dem-shill clowns realized back in 2008 that Obama was sentencing us to another ten-year commitment to extreme squander. 'Cuz that reality didn't fit the hope-n-change narrative.

Now in 2011, what really torques libprogs and dem shills such as Susan Milligan is how apparent it is that Obama-Biden are no better than Bush-Cheney when it comes to waging perpetual war. Obama-Biden are actually worse.

Obama's 'smart' Afghanistan war turned out to be even dumber than Bush's 'stupid' Iraq war. Developments there aren't headline news, so you'll have to news google Karzai to get a full waft of how bad things are going.

And along the way we popped bin Laden and now al-Awlaki, and only had to drop trillions and wreck our economy to do so.

Also, you can take your pick of comical euphemisms: There's Bush's 'enhanced interrogation techniques' and Obama calling his lawyer-shopped non-war Libyan war a 'kinetic military action.'

Now while Bush-Cheney and Obama-Biden protagonists and shills go Three Stooges/lovers-quarrel on each other, trying to poke each other in the eye -- a whoop-whoop-whoop-whoop -- and trying to grab each others' nose --a gnah-gnah-gnah-gnah -- in the attempt to prove who is the *****smarter***** stupid-war wager, there's one inevitable conclusion to draw:

Ron Paul, 2012. As he pointed out, the last war that ended well for us was WWII, because that was the last time that Congress actually declared war. And we are at that point yet again where our current war cannot end well for us. It can just end. The sooner the better. The sooner the better to serve our national security, which begins with a strong economy.

To serve that purpose there's really only one choice for the next president -- Paul. Otherwise, at least six more years and trillions more to get our Afghanistan involvement down to a low-boil (from our perspective) -- and Afghanistan itself improved to the point where it could possibly be only as unstable and corrupt as Iraq is today.

dom youngross of OH 6:31PM October 05, 2011

Brucetee

Again brucetee, when does raising taxes on rich gain more government revenue than reducing on rich.

barry had no deferment because there was no required service in his day. He did not serve his country freely. He sends others to fight. Chaney was legally deferred. In that respect, both are Chicken hawks if Caney is.

1. Brucetee writes “as to taxes and revenues,these current rates have been in place since bush pushed them through congress.they are in no small part as to the reason we,as a country,that we find ourselves in this fiscal abyss.”

How is that ? Bush tax cuts for rich increased government revenue as I have shown using CBO numbers.

Bill Clinton, Acorn, lawyer obama, Frank, Dodds, and other Democrats STOPPED Bush's efforts to stop/lessen recession. Have provide proof which you natural ignored.

2. Read what Shining Glory of Truth of FL wrote. He said it very well our job plans STOPPED by Senate. You sure are short on facts...

Bill Hedges of MO 7:23PM October 04, 2011

Susan Milligan

Susan Milligan

Susan Milligan is a political and foreign affairs writer and contributed to a biography of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Last Lion: The Fall and Rise of Ted Kennedy.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

Obama's Mixed-Bag Week

The Obama camp can celebrate Dick Lugar defeat, but should worry about the Scott Walker recall.

Mary Kate Cary

Obama Attacks as Economic Cliff Looms

The president can't afford to talk about the economy, but with a 2013 fiscal time bomb approaching, the rest of us can't afford not to.

Latest Video

advertisement